There is no free lunch: using mechanical amplification results in the same problem as described above, and spring return means that your actuator has to push that much harder to overcome the spring.
Net is that a couple of figures of merit limit the performance of electromagnetic systems, and being sneaky won't let you exceed them.
I'm with you on honesty, and I've certainly seen people tacitly trying to pass off AI outputs as human written. But I think we've reached a point where, in lots of contexts, we can't reasonably assume human authorship by default any more. (We can reasonably want it and push for it! I just mean we can't literally expect it.) So even when we would prefer openness, I think 'lying by omission' is too harsh a characterisation for people who choose not to declare AI authorship but don't actively try to cover it up.
Honesty is the whole problem with ideas like this. If you're the kind of deluded idiot that considers LLM-generated crap "your code", stating exactly how little you had to do with it is not in your advantage. Far easier to maintain the lie.
They sure don't, but often insight into/alignment with the story and development process makes all the difference for which projects people choose to contribute to.
It’s not being stolen because he would have published it knowing the copyright laws. Also even with copyright laws as they are, selling unlicensed copies isn’t theft. It’s illegal but no stealing is involved.
I'd argue that the question is pretty much what should constitute "stealing" and what doesn't. You're certainly entitled to the opinion that it is, but that's a bit circular in terms of justifying a length of copyright. Not everyone will agree with you on whether it would make sense to consider it "stealing" after a certain length of time.
Looking past that specific word choice, there's an implication here that only the author would have an unbiased opinion on it. I'd argue that they're just as likely to have a bias that would cause them to argue for a policy that is unnecessarily onerous because by the same logic, they're not the ones who would be missing or on anything from it.
You've completely misunderstood the social contract inherent in copyright. There's no theft in adaptation. Copyright is an intentional trade-off by society to incentivise the creation of new works for society's benefit by giving authors a temporary monopoly. Perpetual copyright would obviously maximize the incentives for authors, but harm society by precluding the creation of new works based on the original. Instead, society chooses a limited period where authors can get most of the benefit while trying to keep the period short enough that works remain relevant.
Using absurd language to describe absurd people is a rhetorical device that is suitable for HN.
If the administration hired serious people who don’t wear costumes and act ridiculous to get publicity, I wouldn’t have to write absurd descriptions about them.
Jim Mattis and John Kelly were serious people who did not wear costumes and treated their offices and the people below them with respect. They were Trump’s first SecDef and DHS Secretary, respectively.
This absurd language idea is good. Let me have a try...
Clearly everyone except the nerdy web developers that populate HN is completely incompetent. The aforementioned web developers though - they know everything due to all the time they spend on Twitter. I wonder why they aren't in charge of the country, must be a great conspiracy.
Tons of questions, this is incredibly cool! Can you discuss:
1.) How you compensate for anode consumption/geometry changes over the lifetime of the anode. For instance, does the center get worn away or do you try to uniformly use each "pixel".
2.) More details on anode "pixel" geometry and minimum feature size.
3.) Can you talk about the development process? Did you have in situ measurement, or post build analysis of the part and anode.
Net is that a couple of figures of merit limit the performance of electromagnetic systems, and being sneaky won't let you exceed them.
reply